About your Search

20130201
20130228
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)
. >> there are restraints. >> we're going to be debating -- >> in the pentagon and the cia. >> i mean, his little deputies are over there telling him what he can and can't do? >> this is going to be an ongoing debate in this program, there's no question about it. this is a whole new world. exit question. the united nations human rights council is now examining drone strikes. if some or all of anti- terrorist drone use is found to constitute war crimes, and the u.n. rules the matter to the icc, which is the u.n.'s international criminal court, will president obama be able to travel overseas for the rest of his life without fearing ending up in the icc docket? >> you shoe tell the icc to mind its own business but we should have the congress of the united states and the leaders of the united states debate this issue and set rules of engagement we can all agree upon and follow. >> point is well taken. stop trying to sweep this under the rug. >> let's put it up-front. >> eleanor. >> these are valid questions, and they were debated in the hearing for the confirmation of john brennan this week. it is how a democ
. the warning was aimed at defense department workers at the pentagon and around the world. secretary panetta sent them a written message, as he left for a nato defense ministers meeting in brussels. in it, he said there are limited options for coping with the looming across-the-board cuts. and, he said: >> on our civilians it will be catastrophic. >> woodruff: within hours, top pentagon officials were out, saying employees could lose one day of work per week for 22 weeks. civilians will experience a 20 percent decrease in their pay between late april and september. as a result, many families will be forced to make difficult decisions on where their financial obligations lie. >> reporter: the furloughs could start in late april and save roughly $5 billion. uniformed personnel at war would be exempt, but in a letter to congress, panetta wrote that the spending cuts will slow training and the procurement of weapons. the result, he said, will be a hollow force. the nation's top military leader had said as much last week at a senate hearing on the automatic cuts. chair of the joint chiefs of staf
nations and people in the pentagon can count votes too. we've never had a defense secretary with this many opposing votes. now this is something he can shake off, but it's going to take some time. >> woodruff: that's right. i mean he has the fewest confirming volts of any defense secretary since the job was created. mark thompson, how does that affect his ability to do his job? >> well, it will depend. it will affect it in a big way if he acts as he did in his con for megs hearing which by all accounts he did not do well. conversely, i talked to people in the pentagon. the lower in ranks you go, the more they like this guy. the more they like the sense that an enlisted man is going to run the building. if you can use that as a springboard he's facing immense challenges from sequestration to afghanistan to a nuclear iran but it's an opportunity for him to seize the moment. if he does, people will forget this pretty quickly i think. >> woodruff: what about the sour relations or whatever lingering effect there is from this loud vote of no confidence from republicans in the senate? does that a
it calls "non- lethal" assistance. and with panetta's departure from the pentagon today, plus clinton's last week and petraeus's resignation in 2012, general dempsey is the only known remaining advocate of arming the rebels still in a top advisory role. i'm joined who served in the obama administration state departments and is now dean of the school of advanced international studies at johns hopkins university. and andrew tabler, a senior fellow at the washington institute for near east policy. what were the main schools of thought. how did the camps break down in this argument inside the administration on what to do about syria, andrew? >> basically you have a discussion about syria about all the different options. and it really comes down to this. the white house was hedgingment they really did not want to get involved in syria. they have a firm policy to stay out of the middle east and would like to pull back. at the same time the agencies that deal with syria and the problem there, which is growing and mushrooming, the state department, cia and to a certain extent the department o
, if you will. we do have an opportunity to talk to several people within the pentagon and what we found we were very disappointed by was that they weren't taking the steps that they really needed to take to address this problem. >> brown: is this for you an act of... is it journalism? is it art? i mean it's film making. how do you see what your doing? >> well, i guess i see myself as an artist. but as an artist i think you take on the greatest challenge you can. to put all these things together, the art, film making, journalism into one, i see it as an artistic enterprise but at the same time, of course, when you're dealing with this kind of subject, you have to be very journalistically precise which we were. but it's a challenge. i mean this film was being made actually for two audiences. one was for the film making audience. it's been very successful. it was nominated for academy award. it's won many audience awards but it was also made for policy makers in washington d.c. >> brown: you had them in mind absolutely. i remember cut by cut we'd be thinking, this will play to an audience but
to that point, all of a sudden we've got 3,000 dead americans, the trade towers are taken out, the pentagon's been hit. if it hadn't been for the folks on 93 they'd have taken out the white house or the capitol on washington, d.c. worst attack in our history. worse than pearl harbor by far. and it was our job to make certain it didn't happen again. we were concerned for a couple of rps, partly because the expectation was there would be a follow on attack, nearly everybody believed it. but we also received intelligence that al qaeda was trying to get their hands on deadlier weapons. >> rose: do you regret nothing about the aftermath in terms of how we -- >> regarding 9/11? >> rose: everything that we did and that you were and the president were at the center of the response to 9/11. look back and say "we regret nothing"? >> that's my view. >> rose: none? >> correct. >> rose: you know this has been debated, too. >> sure. >> rose: were we prepared for the consequences after saddam was overthrown? >> well, that was the second proposition. you asked me about the aftermath of 9/11, the policies w
critical american infrastructure the pentagon is planning a range of defensive measures including a massive expansion of its own signer security force. joining me to discuss the developing background is david sanger of the "new york times." he cowrote today's front page story on the subject. joining us later is dune lawrence of bloomberg businessweek if and michael riley of bloomberg. they are learning everything they could. >> so far it's clear they've been into those systems it's not clear they've ever done anything to them. >> rose: why -- >> that's the remarkable question charlie. always the issue is intent and the degree to which the political leadership in china actually is knowledgeable about this and to what degree of control it has over it. because chinese command and control is not always what we image it from afar. in this case, unit 61398 which is the major cyber intelligence unit for the pla but not their own cyber operation. sort of their equivalent of the national security agency or our cyber command which is located at the national security agency in fort mead. >> rose: c
Search Results 0 to 12 of about 13 (some duplicates have been removed)

Terms of Use (10 Mar 2001)